Arrest the judge

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Trump has a good case against Biden and Garland for violating his 4th amendment rights.
Of course, the mouth breather Klanocrats don't know what the 4th amendment is.

 

[Rigby5]

You mean like democrat's did and still do to SCOTUS judges?

But SCOTUS judges obviously not only are wrong, but imposing their religion on individuals illegally.

Appointing an impartial "special master" is not only legal, but the ONLY way to be remotely legal, since the public and the judge don't know what was in the docs.

 

[Rigby5]

DoJ had to be able to do it’s job. A special master simply isn’t warranted when so few documents have any reasonable claim of privilege.

“Not trusting” the DoJ isn’t sufficient reason. Otherwise every case would get a special master which is stupid. To arrive at her decision, Cannon has to ignore precedent and law to arrive at her conclusion. It shows she didn’t really listen to arguments. She had made up her mind first and decided her reasoning second.

Wrong.
Most cased to not require a "special master" because the judge and jury can decide after the evidence has been presented in court.
In the case of classified docs, the judge and jury can not be shown the docs.
Neither can the public.
So the a special master is absolutely essential, required, and the only legal way to proceed at this point.
And there is no "precedent".
No one has ever tried to raid an ex-president before.
It does not matter what the arguments were.
The search likely was in violation of Trumps rights of privacy, executive privilege, and attorney/client privilege.
To have granted the search warrant, there should have been absolute proof of criminal acts, and there was none.
It is perfectly legal for ex-presidents to have classified docs given to them when president.

 

[mudwhistle]

Cannon’s opinion was devoid of legal reasoning and justices itself by vibes and feels. It abandons precedent and ignores law because she wanted to cut Trump a break.

Trump should fire his lawyers and just hire Cannon. She’s way more effective at arguing his case than they are.

WTF are you talking about?
This case is still a long way from being argued in court....if ever.

I think it's harassment by the FBI and just another attempt to tarnish Trump's reputation....which will result in civil lawsuits galore.

 

[kyzr]

DoJ had to be able to do it’s job. A special master simply isn’t warranted when so few documents have any reasonable claim of privilege.
“Not trusting” the DoJ isn’t sufficient reason. Otherwise every case would get a special master which is stupid. To arrive at her decision, Cannon has to ignore precedent and law to arrive at her conclusion. It shows she didn’t really listen to arguments. She had made up her mind first and decided her reasoning second.

1. I agree with Rigby5's post #125.

2. Here is a quote from a Harvard Law Professor:
ALAN DERSHOWITZ: The judge has an easy job. Of course, she should appoint a special master. You can’t trust the Justice Department alone to look at these documents and keep them confidential and make ultimate judgments about which are privileged, which are not. There is an obligation to have an outside person look at this. Who is guarding the guardians? The Justice Department can’t be trusted to guard itself and to make judgements about itself.

3. The Judge also saw the affidavit that the search warrant is based on. Mudwhistle's post #104 has several reasons why the search warrant may be illegal, not even looking at the probably illegal affidavit. For example, were documents being destroyed? If not, there is no basis for the raid. A subpoena should have been issued before a raid was authorized. Was there a real crime with real evidence? Or was the raid a J6 fishing expedition?

4. The DOJ has to do its job? Like investigate Hunter's laptop? The DOJ are partisan hacks. A "special master" is essential when classified documents, atty-client documents, Hippa records, passports, not to mention Melania's panties, are involved.

5. Its obvious the DOJ is being pressured to look for any evidence related to J6. Pathetic.

 

[Marener]

Wrong.
Most cased to not require a "special master" because the judge and jury can decide after the evidence has been presented in court.
In the case of classified docs, the judge and jury can not be shown the docs.
Neither can the public.
So the a special master is absolutely essential, required, and the only legal way to proceed at this point.
And there is no "precedent".
No one has ever tried to raid an ex-president before.
It does not matter what the arguments were.
The search likely was in violation of Trumps rights of privacy, executive privilege, and attorney/client privilege.
To have granted the search warrant, there should have been absolute proof of criminal acts, and there was none.
It is perfectly legal for ex-presidents to have classified docs given to them when president.

No presidents have tried squirreling away highly classified documents and refused to give them back. Not since the PRA was passed.

Precedent says that classified documents cannot be hidden from current presidents by claims of executive privilege. The judge further said Biden hasn’t tried to overrule Trump’s claim of executive privilege, which is a lie and provided in the NARA letter to Trump’s lawyers.

 

[mudwhistle]

No presidents have tried squirreling away highly classified documents and refused to give them back. Not since the PRA was passed.

Precedent says that classified documents cannot be hidden from current presidents by claims of executive privilege. The judge further said Biden hasn’t tried to overrule Trump’s claim of executive privilege, which is a lie and provided in the NARA letter to Trump’s lawyers.

No president has ever been accused falsely of stealing classified documents before.....but the Democrat Party likes making history with their fascist and criminal acts.

 

[kyzr]

No presidents have tried squirreling away highly classified documents and refused to give them back. Not since the PRA was passed.
Precedent says that classified documents cannot be hidden from current presidents by claims of executive privilege. The judge further said Biden hasn’t tried to overrule Trump’s claim of executive privilege, which is a lie and provided in the NARA letter to Trump’s lawyers.

1. Depends if Trump declassified them while he was president. He had that authority.

2. Agree Exec Privilege rests with the current president

3. So if Trump made those records his personal property while president, that is it, period. Precedent says they are Trumps, like Clinton's tapes are Clintons.

Presidential records found right in Clinton’s drawer

A 2012 court case denying access to White House audiotapes kept in former President Bill Clinton’s sock drawer after he left office could help the Trump legal team in its battle to retrieve records that the FBI seized from Mar-a-Lago this month.

www.washingtontimes.com

"Judge Jackson ruled that the tapes belonged to Mr. Clinton, even though the discussions included a broad range of presidential matters. The court ruled that the National Archives and Records Administration had no power to “seize control of them” because Mr. Clinton had used his authority under the Presidential Records Act to declare the recordings part of his personal records.
The Clinton case could impact the pending court battle over dozens of boxes of records that former President Donald Trump had declared personal, but which the FBI seized from his Mar-a-Lago home on Aug. 8."

 

[XponentialChaos]

Yeah....we get medals and stuff for beating the crap out of snowflake assholes like you.

You’re not going to beat the crap out of anyone. Shut the fuck up.

 

[XponentialChaos]

This can't be settled by peaceful means.

What are you going to do that isn’t peaceful? Not a god damn thing.

You people are so dramatic.

 

[scruffy]

As opposed to threatening her and her children.

Which is what Democommies do.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Correct. Lock and Load.

Go ahead, keyboard warrior.

Lead the charge.

 

[Billy_Bob]

But SCOTUS judges obviously not only are wrong, but imposing their religion on individuals illegally.

Appointing an impartial "special master" is not only legal, but the ONLY way to be remotely legal, since the public and the judge don't know what was in the docs.

SCOTUS did not apply religion, they applied the law. Abortion is not something the fed should be involved in and it was returned to its rightful place with the states.

 

[BackAgain]

But SCOTUS judges obviously not only are wrong, but imposing their religion on individuals illegally.

Neither obvious nor true at all.

 

[Marener]

WTF are you talking about?
This case is still a long way from being argued in court....if ever.

I think it's harassment by the FBI and just another attempt to tarnish Trump's reputation....which will result in civil lawsuits galore.

If there’s a civil lawsuit, it’ll be dismissed. It’s a criminal investigation. It’s always geared towards deciding if it’ll be prosecuted and how.

 

[Marener]

1. I agree with Rigby5's post #125.

2. Here is a quote from a Harvard Law Professor:
ALAN DERSHOWITZ: The judge has an easy job. Of course, she should appoint a special master. You can’t trust the Justice Department alone to look at these documents and keep them confidential and make ultimate judgments about which are privileged, which are not. There is an obligation to have an outside person look at this. Who is guarding the guardians? The Justice Department can’t be trusted to guard itself and to make judgements about itself.

3. The Judge also saw the affidavit that the search warrant is based on. Mudwhistle's post #104 has several reasons why the search warrant may be illegal, not even looking at the probably illegal affidavit. For example, were documents being destroyed? If not, there is no basis for the raid. A subpoena should have been issued before a raid was authorized. Was there a real crime with real evidence? Or was the raid a J6 fishing expedition?

4. The DOJ has to do its job? Like investigate Hunter's laptop? The DOJ are partisan hacks. A "special master" is essential when classified documents, atty-client documents, Hippa records, passports, not to mention Melania's panties, are involved.

5. Its obvious the DOJ is being pressured to look for any evidence related to J6. Pathetic.

1. I replied. He’s confused about facts
2. Dershowitz says “you can’t” but doesn’t say why. Fact is filter teams are employed routinely. If they screwed up, Trump can suppress evidence before trial. It’s not irreparable harm.
3. Mudwhistle is confused about facts. There was a subpoena. The subpoena was not complied with. Therefore you get raided. This has nothing to do with Cannon.
4. Hunter Biden is currently subject to an investigation. Do you think Hunter Biden got a special master? Nope.
5. Lame and speculative.

 

[Marener]

No president has ever been accused falsely of stealing classified documents before.....but the Democrat Party likes making history with their fascist and criminal acts.

No president has been quite this stupid. Trump had plenty of opportunity to turn it over. He kept them anyway.

 

[lantern2814]

A Trump appointed judge is kissing his fat ass

Legal experts slam special master ruling as ‘nutty’ and ‘radical’

Roy Cohn was known for saying, “Don’t tell me what the law is, tell me who the judge is.” The relevance of that quote lingers for a reason.

www.msnbc.com

MSN

www.msn.com

See post #8 moron. Then slink off in shame.

 

[citygator]

I firmly believe there are Prog judges who will send Repub voters to concentration camps to be killed.
All is needed is the direction by the politicians.

You’re insane.

 

[Flopper]

Democrats have accused Aileen Cannon of obstruction of justice by appointing a special master. Democrats have called her unfit for the bench and are demanding she gets impeached.

Experts accuse Trump judge of “obstruction of justice” over ruling

Critics say Judge Aileen Cannon is "one of the most corrupt" judges appointed by Trump.

www.salon.com

Enemy democrats are not willing to accept any election they didn't rig or the decisions of any judge they don't agree with.


This can't be settled by peaceful means.

Let's put this ruling in perspective. Is it going to delay the DOJ examination of documents? Yes
Is it likely to help Trump's other than delaying the DOJ. No.

In requiring a special master, the judge set down these ground rules. The special master will examine the documents to see if there is any information:

• That would fall under attorney client privilege. This would mean personal communication between Trump and his lawyers. That in effect eliminates all the classified documents and confines the search to communication to an from Trump and his lawyers. The DOJ has already done that.
• That would fall under executive privilege. The legal definition of executive privilege is protection of confidential communications within the executive branch and to allow the president to receive candid advice from advisers to facilitate better deliberations by being assured that those communications will generally be protected from disclosure to outsiders. This again excludes classified documents.

The bottom line is that this action will not affect the admissibility of classified documents. It could eliminate a few of the presidential document due executive privilege but the vast number of documents he took would still be admissible.

What this will accomplish is to delay the investigation. It's not likely to delay it till after 2024 when we could have new president who might pardon Trump. Possibly Trump wants to be fighting this legal battle during his campaign. He could certainly whip up enough anger among his supporters to march on Washington and finish what they started on Jan 6th. That probably would not get him elected but it might give him a lot personal satisfaction.